Maneuver and Fire Support
Equipment Substitution Matrices
The matrices in this appendix illustrate some of the different equipment options available to scenario and order of battle developers. Although this organization guide provides a baseline of widely-used systems produced in the former Soviet Union (FSU), the intent of the capabilities-based OPFOR is to allow users to tailor their orders of battle by substituting other worldwide systems. Deviations from the baseline systems should relate to specific training objectives. For example, users may desk to mirror the actual mix of equipment found in a particular region or to introduce a particular weapons capability or vulnerability.
The matrixes list most of the major baseline systems in the organization guide and provide a number of potential substitutes for each. While the lists of potential substitutes are not all-inclusive, they contain most common systems that have roughly comparable capabilities. They also contain some alternative systems that may perform the same missions (with greater or lesser capability) or have different capabilities for special uses. Entries may include system name, caliber of main armament, vehicle mount (for self-propelled systems), and digraph for country of origin. Entries within the alternative category also include one of the following symbols identifying each system's capabilities in relation to the baseline:
(+) More capable.
(-) Less capable.
(*) Different capabilities for special uses.
Users substituting systems from the matrices or considering other foreign weapons systems for use in an OPFOR order of battle should evaluate candidate substitutes against the following criteria:
- Is the system available to potential adversaries? To satisfy this criterion, the system should be in service with the armed forces of countries traditionally hostile to the United States or widely exported on the world market.
- Does the system exist in large enough quantities to justify training against it? At a minimum, total system production should at least equal the numbers contained in a proposed order of battle. Moreover, US military units using currently available equipment generally should not train against foreign developmental systems that have not reached initial operational capability (IOC).
- Does the mix and variety of systems in an order of battle conform to some logical pattern? Some users constructing a large order of battle may want to pattern the mix of system types and generations on some actual country. Others may wish to standardize systems throughout the order of battle for simplicity or ease in modeling. In any case, the systems portrayed generally should be in unit sets of regimental or battalion size. Because of the logistics and training challenges involved in supporting a weapon system, users should avoid excessive variety.
Users should keep in mind that substitutions for major weapons systems may also affect the types and numbers of supporting systems.
|Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list|